191–200 of 611 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They should be liable by default. But of course people at a lower position can be liable for their own crimes. That is for a court to decide.
That is a perversion of justice and sets unimaginably bad precedent.
Is this a normal thing? Seems odd.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the ship's captain was asleep in a drunken stupor while the 17 year old helmsman crashed the ship into an iceberg, should the captain go unpunished? I feel that punishing sobriety and rewarding drunkenness is probably not a good idea, if we want to avoid our ships hitting icebergs.
Bad analogies won't help anyone. Did the CEO believe his people were incompetent to develop and verify the software?
Plenty of people have to respect a much higher standard of accountability: did the CEO take actions to ensure that proper adherence to industry standard was respected? Which processes were put in place to ascertain the continued respect of these standards?
In many jobs, incompetence will get you in jail. Sure, sometimes your reports go out of their way to conceal issues, but aside from extreme cases, a CEO should have to show what they did to prevent issues, and merely "believing" should land them in jail.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Boards are often toothless though, just look at Tesla's. Replace the C-suite. This is done frequently in M&A's and other corporate strategies in extremis. Fire the guys at the top and replace them with people with good track records.
You can rotate people in and out of the C-suite, but incentives and culture aren’t going to change. These people are largely figureheads that get paid a lot of money because they are Ivy Leaguers whose friends on company boards who set their salaries are all Ivy Leaguers, too. It’s not like Boeing is going to get a new CEO and then suddenly middle management is going to start prioritizing safety, engineering rigor, a…
The people saying “send the CEO to jail” or “make the board liable” are vastly oversimplifying the complexity of the issue here, which is about how to enforce regulations and standards without torpedoing your economy. One of the single most important reasons why the US has such a successful business culture is because of its approach to liability - virtually all business debt can be erased in a bankruptcy, and the en…
In other words it punished those that couldn't add something to the US -like engineers that could build rockets for example. Basically what you are saying is crime has no upper limit of evil if the criminal is seen as better unpunished for the state than not. That's how a lot of Nazis and Japanese that did mass murder and human experiments became US citizen in good standing. To me giving them this out was more evil than the deeds they did.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The problem is that finding the people responsible can be extremely hard > What Boeing really needs is a complete change in management culture Who is ultimately responsible for management at a company though? The CEO and the other C-level people. This isn't really the daunting difficult problem you make it out to be: the buck stops at the C-suite. Who else could possibly be ultimately responsible??
You can not punish someone for a crime they didn't commit and had no knowledge of. That is ridiculous and a perversion of justice.
The only reasons some folks push up there to the top are 2 - power, and money. They receive extra money because they are holding massive responsibility for their part or whole corporation. Lets stop finding reasons why there is actually 0 real responsibility on them. Its literally part of the deal they sign up for, and they know it very well.
Yes, it may sometimes mean that they get the heat for something caused by their predecessors, its part of the risk they take on themselves by pushing into such role. Its still firmly their failure, ie to a) identify it; b) act upon it. But as we see this wasn't a priority in Boeing, and I presume it still isn't.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I do not care about the economy bottom line. I want deaths of people caused by the arguably same motivation of penny-pinching and ever-growing profits translate into at the very least jail times of people that represented and concurred with these horrendously dangerous decisions. When economists are left alone too long, their results do not differ very much from those of serial killers.
The real world isn’t that simple. If you just dismantled Boeing and sent everyone to jail, thousands of people would lose their jobs. America would lose a competitive edge compared to foreign adversaries. As I said in the original comment, the difficulty is in punishing the people responsible while maintaining/rebuilding systems that have better outcomes. Blowing everything up doesn’t do that.
So murder is okay in a private company if it is important enough for "a competitive edge"? That means specifically that they are above the law.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
`without torpedoing your economy` It's OK to kill people, just let the company go bankrupt afterward... Better luck next time! What an immensely unsatisfying bunch of intellectually corrupt market-speak regurgitation. There are laws. Those laws should apply the same to service workers as they do to service operators and CEO's. That is: If you believe in the integrity of your own society. Flouting the law to do influe…
Nowhere did I write that Boeing shouldn’t be punished or that killing people is absolved by bankruptcy. I said that making company operators by default liable would have bad economic consequences. In fact, I suggested that Boeing ought to be treated like Occupied Japan, which to me seems like it ought to be treated pretty harshly.
Seven were hanged and sixteen sentenced to life in prison as the result of Tokyo Trials.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The problem is that finding the people responsible can be extremely hard > What Boeing really needs is a complete change in management culture Who is ultimately responsible for management at a company though? The CEO and the other C-level people. This isn't really the daunting difficult problem you make it out to be: the buck stops at the C-suite. Who else could possibly be ultimately responsible??
You can not punish someone for a crime they didn't commit and had no knowledge of. That is ridiculous and a perversion of justice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I do not care about the economy bottom line. I want deaths of people caused by the arguably same motivation of penny-pinching and ever-growing profits translate into at the very least jail times of people that represented and concurred with these horrendously dangerous decisions. When economists are left alone too long, their results do not differ very much from those of serial killers.
The real world isn’t that simple. If you just dismantled Boeing and sent everyone to jail, thousands of people would lose their jobs. America would lose a competitive edge compared to foreign adversaries. As I said in the original comment, the difficulty is in punishing the people responsible while maintaining/rebuilding systems that have better outcomes. Blowing everything up doesn’t do that.
EDIT: Also: if America’s “edge” largely comes from its business leaders’ immunity from their company’s wrongdoing, then I’m not sure that’s an edge worth keeping.